Du Page Graue Mill Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
366050730
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Oak Brook, IL, USA
Phone
6309209720
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$127,633
Expenses
$136,467
Assets
$887,071
Liabilities
$6,131

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bonnie Sartore (President)
  • Thomas Doyle (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stanley C Strahan (Director): $3,424 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Organization, commonly known as Graue Mill & Museum, operates a restored 19th century gristmill on property leased at nominal cost from the Forest Preserve Dist. of Du Page County, a unit of local government, for the educational, cultural, and scientific benefit of the public.

What it reported doing in 2019

Gristmill Operation: The Organization operates a restored 19th century water-powered gristmill which also houses related artifacts and displays depicting the period 1850-1890, and provides programs for elementary school groups and other visitors that include milling, spinning and weaving, and living history interpretations which illustrate the way of life of area residents during this period of our history and the impact that gristmills had on our cultural heritage. There were 5,742 Mill visitors, including 1,654 children attending in classroom groups from Chicago-land area elementary schools, who toured the Mill facility during 2019. Visitor counts do not including attendees at special events hosted by the Mill throughout the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 34.1%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.5; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.9% of revenue deployed · 34.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.